Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Power

Panasonic Completing 3 New Cell Production Lines At Tesla's Gigafactory (arstechnica.com) 68

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: In a Tuesday interview with Bloomberg, the head of Panasonic's Automotive Division said that the company was on track to complete an additional three battery-cell production lines at Tesla's Nevada Gigafactory before the end of this year. That puts the expansion ahead of schedule for completion. Panasonic is a joint owner of the Gigafactory. The company provides the "2170" battery cells that go into a Model 3 battery pack. Tesla packages those cells to complete the pack. In the interview, Panasonic automotive executive Yoshio Ito told Bloomberg that "the bottleneck for Model 3 production has been our batteries." Ito added, "they just want us to make as many as possible."

In short, more battery cells rolling off more lines at the Gigafactory are good for Model 3 production only if the manufacturing process gets smoother. There's evidence that this is happening, as the company was able to sell more than 28,000 Model 3s in the second quarter of 2018, albeit at the slight expense of Model S and Model X production. The three new Panasonic lines will bring the number of cell-producing lines up to 13, Bloomberg wrote. Ito told the news service that Tesla is currently using all of its Gigafactory capacity to produce vehicle batteries, despite initially planning to reserve 30 percent of its capacity to build stationary storage batteries like Powerwalls and Powerpacks. That has played out in long-delayed Powerwall installations.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Panasonic Completing 3 New Cell Production Lines At Tesla's Gigafactory

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    It looks like they'll supply every EV with batteries from the Panasonic Gigafactory.

    EV future secured.

  • by Rei ( 128717 )

    Short short short! Tesla's going down, right? Musk is a crazy fraud, right? [youtube.com] This could be your last chance!

  • The difference. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Gravis Zero ( 934156 ) on Thursday September 27, 2018 @05:45PM (#57387324)

    Most everything (for a long time) used/uses 18650 battery cells which are 18mm in diameter and 65mm in height. 21700 battery cells (AKA "2170") are 21mm in diameter, 70mm in height and only made specifically for electric vehicles.

    TL;DR: image comparison. [evobsession.com]

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      LG and SK Innovation have gone a different route, with pouch cells of the type found in phones for automotive use. They are cheaper and higher energy density and it shows with significantly lower costs then Panasonic right now.

      • who said that LG/SK cells are cheaper? They make heavy use of things like Cobalt, while Tesla 2170 does not.
        And where are you seeing LG/SK with higher energy density over the 2170?
        • Re:The difference. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Friday September 28, 2018 @03:05AM (#57388806) Homepage Journal

          We can only infer from the price of cars using their packs, but consider this. Hyundai/Kia will give you a top spec car with 70kWh battery for a lot less money than a stripped down base Model 3 with 50kWh battery. Additionally we can see the price difference between the PHEV versions and EV versions of the Hyundai/Kia cars, which gives us a pretty good indication of the battery cost.

          • by torkus ( 1133985 )

            Funny, people keep pointing out how ALL THESE EVs are SO MUCH better than the Tesla Model....anything.

            Yet they either don't exist, don't compare, or fall far short in several ways. For example, the Kona EV which I assume you're referring to is targeting to have 2,500 delivered this year. Total, not per month or per week.

            You also assume that other car manufacturers are pricing these vehicles with the same markup as anything else. Hint: they aren't. They're loss-leaders to drive sales in general and get

          • the original cell was one the cheapest and highest density. Now the 2170 has 50% increase in volume for 200% energy. [evannex.com]as to pricing, Hyundai/Kia pay cost or less from LG. LG continues to sell at decent prices to GM and non s. Korean firms. In addition add in the fact that Tesla has a fraction of Cobalt that others use. Then add in S. Korean one of a number of nations that are manipulating their won vs. the dollar. [google.com] Sorry, but I seriously doubt that the others come close.
            • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

              Where did you hear that Kia are paying less than cost price?

              In any case, one of the major innovations from LG has been to reduce the amount of cobalt used in the cells. Combined with the more efficient form factor they managed to get the price right down.

              • uh no.
                It is TESLA, that reduced the cobalt used in the cells.
                You will notice that it is Panasonic (using Tesla's R&D) that will remove ALL COBALT from their li batteries soon. [google.com]
                LG is currently using 612 (i.e. 6 parts nickel, 1 part Manganese, and 2 parts Cobalt), and trying to get to 811.
                Tesla 2170 started several years ago as 811, and they are working to change it to 810. IOW, Cobalt will be a none-issue for Tesla on the next version.
                • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                  Um... So, why can't LG do that too? I mean, if it's a good idea, why wouldn't they be working on it too?

                  By the way, the Google search you linked to says Panasonic did it. No mention of Tesla R&D... Which makes sense, I mean why would Tesla set up an R&D operation when Panasonic already has one and they work together anyway?

                  • The 2170 R&D is 100% Teslas and the article is wrong about it being Panasonic. Panasonic manufacturers the battery, since it is their equipment. But it is Tesla's instructions.
                    Tesla has devoted a LOT of money to R&D. In fact, some 17% of their revenues goes to R^D. That is one of the largest in the world.
                    • OH, BTW, LG can do the same. In fact, they are working towards that. They have to figure out how to manufacture it correctly, or they will have either shorter lifetimes, or possibly fires.
    • Re:The difference. (Score:5, Informative)

      by mea_culpa ( 145339 ) on Thursday September 27, 2018 @06:22PM (#57387550)

      If you haven't seen it PBS NOVA made a great documentary about these batteries:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4McN9OYDwg

    • It would be entirely reasonable for any application with 18mm cells to switch to 21mm cells, barring those cases where it's geometrically impossible, if there's benefits to cost and performance. I won't be surprised if you start seeing 21mm cells in other devices.
      • by torkus ( 1133985 )

        You sound like a few project managers I know. Providing seemingly useful information which instead is both completely obvious and entirely useless.

        It would be entirely reasonable for any kitchen serving apples to switch to bananas, barring those cases where it's nutritionally impossible, if there's benefits to cost and taste. I wouldn't be surprised if you started seeing bananas in other kitchens.

        • Bananas are not a substitute for apples. Battery cells often are a substitute for battery cells.
          • by torkus ( 1133985 )

            So 1) your 'contribution' is even more redundant and useless and 2) as typical for a PM, you'd more interested in defending your incorrect viewpoint than understanding the context and moving the project forward.

            No one said we were making Apple pies.

            • What is "incorrect" about my viewpoint? This wouldn't be the first time that, for example, power tools had switched cells. What "project" are you talking about?
    • Re:The difference. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by rtb61 ( 674572 ) on Friday September 28, 2018 @12:07AM (#57388554) Homepage

      Used to be mainly for electric vehicles. Battery packs for solar powered homes and battery packs for vehicle are very similar. Panasonic pumping up the number of production lines, well Tesla also sells complete solar systems and they will likely sell far more of them them they do cars. Cars for Tesla are upmarket, the solar powered home system with battery pack are mass market and that's where the big dollars are and where probably over the mid term, where the bulk of Tesla profits will come.

      Pretty soon, people will not be going solar without also doing batteries and a complete system with a reliable installer is where the market is headed. You can expect Tesla to figure highly in this market, whether they choose to have installers on wages or franchises or a mix, is yet to become apparent.

      There is more money for Tesla in solar home power system with battery packs, then there is in just the segment of high end vehicles, cheaper to produce, much larger market, far simpler production. Good thing he picked up the solar panel manufacturer to go with Panasonic batteries and whom ever provides the control systems. Expect revenue from this to overtake cars within the decade. Panasonic expanding production is more to do with the home market than the vehicle market.

  • by AlanObject ( 3603453 ) on Thursday September 27, 2018 @05:52PM (#57387350)

    We just had a Musk/SEC/Fraud thread, so I checked in here and was amazed to see about 7 posts and not one yet called Musk delusional. The haters are off their game I guess.

    What I would like to know is:

    1. Will the Model S and Model X ever get a retrofit to the 2170 battery type? What are the economics of this? Is there a reason now not to do it?

    2. Is Tesla planning on selling these batteries to other EV makers?

    3. How much of the production of the Gigafactory allocated to the Model 3 verses the power wall product?

    • by Cyberax ( 705495 )
      Tesla S retrofit is theoretically possible but it's highly unlikely. The original Model S battery pack was designed for rapid pack switching. This proved to be unnecessary, so it's likely going to be removed in favor of more space for batteries.

      Model S also badly needs a refresh, so it's likely they are going to redesign its battery pack for the next version. Theoretically it would give a boost of around 10% of the range, giving almost 400 miles for the highest model.
      • Not sure why you think that MS needs a refresh.
        We own a 2013, and I can tell you that the current 2018 is radically different than ours. Basically, Tesla constantly improves the cars (iterative design), while other car makers have to do the refresh due to no improvements (waterfall design).
        • by Cyberax ( 705495 )
          I have 2015 Model S and a shiny new Model 3.

          The central console computer in Model S is woefully underpowered, the interior needs a little bit of update. More importantly, the air conditioner and heating need to be buffed up a little bit - both are not quite adequate for most extreme conditions. It would also be nice to have HUD, laser headlamps and webcam mirrors (in Europe).
          • by Rei ( 128717 )

            The last we heard, a S/X refresh was planned for 2H 2019. Although there will likely be minor updates before then. In addition to updating the screen and computer, they've also talked about moving to the Model 3's vent system. Although it's not clear whether that would be before or during the refresh.

            So long as they can move 100k/yr S+X, they have no need to improve things, because that's all the 2170s they have. And since the global EV market keeps growing, "100k/yr" is an ever-shrinking fraction of th

    • Is Tesla planning on selling these batteries to other EV makers?

      I would think it would be Panasonic selling the batteries to other makers. Why go through a middle man?

    • We just had a Musk/SEC/Fraud thread, so I checked in here and was amazed to see about 7 posts and not one yet called Musk delusional. The haters are off their game I guess.

      .

      Calling people "haters" is a childishly simple-minded response to a situation that is far from black and white.

      I watched the entire Rogan : Musk interview, and I don't think Musk is delusional, but I do think Musk is full of himself in a way that would cause some people to dislike him. Musk exudes the sort of arrogance that can literally cause some people to want to beat a person up. It's painfully obvious that Musk is _all about Musk_ despite all Musk's bullshit posing about "saving the planet".

      I didn't h

    • We just had a Musk/SEC/Fraud thread, so I checked in here and was amazed to see about 7 posts and not one yet called Musk delusional. The haters are off their game I guess.

      There are too many targets for people to make angry comments at nonstop right now I guess. More and more political spam ammunition gets loaded up everyday. I guess Musk someone got shoved aside.

      2. Is Tesla planning on selling these batteries to other EV makers?

      I would imagine they'd only start selling the batteries if they felt like they were going to completely lose the car market. I do very much want to see more battery developments like what Tesla has been doing so far. Seeing it used as backup power in other countries seems interesting and possibly promising.

    • 1. Will the Model S and Model X ever get a retrofit to the 2170 battery type? What are the economics of this? Is there a reason now not to do it?

      I would guess they'll probably do it whenever they do a major refresh of those vehicles. Changing the supply chain and production system for such a major component would be expensive so it's unlikely they would have enough retrofit business to justify the cost. Right now Tesla needs to focus on getting to profitability with their Model 3 before they worry about stuff like retrofits.

      2. Is Tesla planning on selling these batteries to other EV makers?

      Hard to say but my guess would be eventually yes provided that they can establish some sort of sustainable advantage in batte

  • Back when Tesla first announced that they were going to use 18650 (laptop and cordless tool) batteries, I remember thinking how crazy that sounded because you'd need to use literally thousands of them. It might give you a lot of flexibility in the form factor of the final packs, but it seemed to me that there were too many downsides:

    1) A shit load of welded/soldered connections to manage, which probably adds to the resistance of the final pack by some non-trivial amount.

    2) Lots of smaller cells, each individually packaged, then packaged in a larger module and that module incorporated into the final pack. That sounds like the ratio of weight of packaging to weight of electrochemical material is pretty bad.

    The situation with the new larger 2170 batteries is a bit better, especially on the total current output. But the issue with so many connections and total weight of packaging still seems high.

    Can any one give me technical reasons why small cylindrical cells like this would be superior to pouch or prismatic cells? I always assumed that a good car battery would resemble the form factor of car starter batteries, big rectilinear shapes putting out decent voltage but a shit-load of amps. The only advantage I can think of for the cylindrical format is ease of roll to roll manufacturing. But even there, unless there is some problem with bigger cells (dielectric breakdown at higher amps maybe?) a larger cylindrical form would be better wouldn't it?

    • by Rei ( 128717 ) on Friday September 28, 2018 @05:56AM (#57389084) Homepage

      Tesla has among the highest pack energy densities in the industry, so your notion about the weight of the packaging killing them obviously doesn't ring true.

      The Model 3 packs are put together like giant motherboards. The cells are literally bonded to 2 meter-long PCBs. I doubt you'd argue that all of the bonding that motherboard manufacturers do (capacitors, resistors, etc) is some prohibitive cost ;) The bonds on the cells in the 3 are very thin wires that double as fuses; if a cell short circuits, it melts its wire bonds. Because there are so many cells in a brick, it's easy for current to be routed past it. You can't do this with large prismatic cells, at least not as effectively.

      As for technical reasons for going with small cylindrical cells, there's a couple of them. One is the resilience against failure aspect mentioned above; Tesla packs are designed to allow for cell failures with only a trivial impact on the owner. The other is that they offer a high surface area to volume ratio. This is critical for cooling, mainly during supercharging. Tesla has prioritized effective removal of heat, as they offer much higher charge rates than everyone else.

      Note that there's a common myth that the S and X packs "overheat" during sustained high power driving, and this is why the S and X can't do sustained track duty. This is incorrect; pack temperature is always kept down and does not correspond with throttling. As can be seen from CAN bus readings, throttling corresponds directly with motor temperature. S and X use (inefficient) induction motors. 3, by contrast, uses a much more efficient PMSRM and sees only mild throttling (similar to that experienced in many modern performance gas cars) in sustained track usage.

      • This is pretty off topic but I'd like to pick your brains about the tesla batteries which they will sell for powerwalls in homes and a different chemistry for the same job: https://redflow.com/products/r... [redflow.com]

        To me the powerwall would seem to be a much simpler thing, no pump required etc but lose some capacity over the years. But is that a trivial amount of loss?
    • I just say this yesterday:

      The Truth About Tesla Model 3 Batteries: Part 1
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

      The Truth About Tesla Model 3 Batteries: Part 2
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

      It explains EVERYTHING.
      Why they switched batteries (Pros/cons)
      Why they went with cylinders instead of what the competition is doing.
      Why the Model 3 is so slow to come out and why it should get better.

      (Disclaimer: I own no Tesla stock)

    • by Agripa ( 139780 )

      Can any one give me technical reasons why small cylindrical cells like this would be superior to pouch or prismatic cells? I always assumed that a good car battery would resemble the form factor of car starter batteries, big rectilinear shapes putting out decent voltage but a shit-load of amps.

      Smaller cells result in more wasted volume and mass but this is not a limitation in a traction application and the greater surface area improves temperature control.

      Cylindrical cells are a lot stronger. Prismatic cells and especially pouch cells more easily suffer from delamination.

  • Panasonic automotive executive Yoshio Ito told Bloomberg that "the bottleneck for Model 3 production has been our batteries."

    Though I cannot rule it out since I don't work there, I very much doubt that battery production is the bottleneck. It's not as if their intended production volumes are some sort of secret so if they didn't ramp up battery production to match the expected production schedule then Tesla management is be far dumber than the evidence would suggest unless there was some sort of unexpected resource constraint. I know Tesla tends to operate fast and loose but not building enough production capacity for one of th

Little known fact about Middle Earth: The Hobbits had a very sophisticated computer network! It was a Tolkien Ring...

Working...